In Coronvirus era a misinformation spread throughout the world that by gargling or drinking alcohol covid 19 can be cured naturally. Believing on this fact a lot of people in Iran drinks alcohol which leads to death around 800 people and hospitalization of around 10000 people. This was a result of misinformation, it shows how can a false information can lead to a disaster. This article shows that how misinformation is harmful for society and the way a state can deal with it.
What is misinformation?
Misinformation is a false or inaccurate information made unintentionally by mistakes whereas disinformation is sharing of false information online with an intention to deceive others. Miinformation has various bad effect on public health, public order and political situation. False facts spreading through social media and via other sources.
Misinformtaion as threat for society
Spreading of misinformation by individuals or any organization is a threat to citizens. It can lead to detetrioration of health and disturb the public order, incite violence in nation. Studies from Massachusetts Institute of technology (MIT) found that false news spreads significantly faster than truth news on social media. In this digital era deepfakes a hyper realistic digital forgery- a video, image or voice of a person who is doing something or saying something that they actually never do.
Automated news campaign, a paid collective online campaign attacking a particular propaganda or spreading hate online for money. It’s fake usually done spread hate for instance in Kenya during Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) controversy where Mozilla foundation researchers found that a disinformation campaign has been going on involving thousands of social media accounts criticizing civil judges activist and judiciary by hashtag like #Justice4sale, and #Anarchistjudges.
State has a duty to protect its citizens from misinformation as it poses a danger to human right, public health and integrity of nation. State has a constitutional obligation to protect life and public order and to ensure democratic obligation. State’s regulation of misinformation can lead to a threat of Freedom of Speech and Expression, as state would have monopoly over regulation of information, whats information should be publicize and what shouldn’t in the name of maintaining the integrity of nation. So state has a duty to reduce the spread of misinformation without undermining the right of Freedom of Speech and Expression and Human Right.
Different countries approach to combat misinformation
- US– It have strong Freedom of Speech and Expression allow limited regulation of harmful misinformation to flourish.
- Germany have platform regulation, it talks about whether state regulation can co-exist with free speech.
- India have several platform to combat misinformation and laws to regulate it like IT Act, television Regulation Act for contents.
Landmark Cases
In Handyside v. United Kingdom it was held by European Court that Freedom of Speech and Expression includes offensive and socking ideas but it also grant states a margin of appreciation to restrict speech to protect public morals.
In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India court stuck down section 66A of IT Act. The court ruled that the law which criminalized offensive and menaching messages online is a violation of freedom of Speech and Expression.
In Delfi AS v Estonia it was held by court that publishing of article which contains defamatory comments is publishable offence. Court ordered to remove the content and pay a penalty to the aggrived party.
Conclusion
The rapid increase of digitalisation in present world present one significant issue, misinformation. As false information increasingly influences public health decision, electoral process and trust in democratic decision so the state has a duty to protect its citizens must evolve accordingly. However these obligation cannot be interpreted as a licence to determine truth or suppress dissenting opinion. Rather state has a role to protect from false campaigns and false information. It should create a true information ecosystem, where everyone can rely on their informations. Comparative states responses demonstrate that misinformation control by state is a necessary step but excessive control risks Freedom of Speech and expession and democratic accountability. Ultimately state has duty not to monopolise truth but to preserve the condition in which truth can be discovered and individual’ right to criticism, dissent, and satire remains. in this way, it safeguards both democracy and fundamental right of citizen.